Should third party insurance be mandatory?

[Craig_]

and wassup with them not slowing down for speed bumps?

Slowing down for a small speed bump in a bakkie is like slowing down for a leaf in a car.

The big ones is a different story.

 

[Herr der Verboten]

and wassup with them not slowing down for speed bumps?

speed bumps?

 

[John_Boucher]

it was? maybe I'm too young to remember.

problem is enforcement, you can have a Billion traffic laws, but who will enforce them?
Seat-belts, Hands-free usage, Moving Violations, taillights, Tires, plenty of laws, and taxis do whatever they like whenever they like.

so what use is it all?

Used buy TP along with registration. Discs were displayed concurrently on the windscreen.

 

[Johand]

1) RAF only covers the people involved in the accident and not damage to the vehicles. There needs to be third party insurance that at least covers damage to the vehicles.
2) RAF needs drastic reform in any case. Electric cars are coming and the fuel levy won't work. Plus it is bankrupt. Plus the leeches have attached themselves to that organisation.
3) Transparency is amazing - I'd rather pay for 3rd party insurance than have it hidden in fuel levy.
4) We need reform in enforcement in any case. We need digitally signed RF licenses and a car without valid registration or insurance gets impounded until it gets sorted out. Enforcement can easily be covered for 80%+ of the vehicles on the road if we use technology adequately and the traffics cops are suitably motivated.

 

[Fudpukker]

e-Toll 2.0?

 

[Zaahidad]

Of course YES... everyone with a vehicle should have one and scrap the RAF...

 

[ArmatageShanks]

No

So many people can't even afford fuel for their vehicles neverminded insurance, especially not how monopolized the industry would become with mandatory insurance, look at the UK.

 

[kevinl38473]

Do you believe [at a minimum] third party insurance should be mandatory for all motor vehicle owners?

Should cyclists also be required to have insurance?

Absolutely, BUT the RAF must be abolished to make way for it. This will also provide a relief at the pump.It will not be fair to further burden motorists with yet another tax if the RAF remains in force. Third party should ONLY be required to be purchased much in the same way as motor vehicle licences ie, yearly, as was done many years ago (as in 1950's-1960's)

 

[GRADER65]

In 80% of countries minimum Third Party Property insurance is mandatory before you can drive a motor vehicle, not sure why this never happened in RSA. The RAF is a total disaster and has been plundered so often, because it is not a business that provides a service

 

[Creag]

Should it be compulsory; definitely a big yes for me. Third party insurance in the context of South Africa is important for third party property damage (vehicles, buildings, traffic lights, etc.) that the negligent driver causes.

 

[Operator]

This discussion has been coming for many years. It is about having liability cover to pay for the damages of other parties if you are the one guilty of causing the damage. It is something totally freestanding and has got nothing to do with the work or function of the Road Accident Fund (RAF)

 

[AlidaP]

The RAF is broke, asking government for assistance and causing soaring claims ratios for medical schemes. The RAF will not rescue you.

 

[Spike.Hodge]

Once 3rd party in mandatory and enforced. You can drop RAF completely.
But more importantly it gives and incentive to drive well.
If I own 4 taxis and need drivers, I will chose the ones with clean licences because I won't be able to afford the cost of insuring bad drivers!
Clean licence good job, bad driving record bad job.
As for the nea-sayers - If we can abolish Apartheid, I'm pretty sure we can make insurance mandatory!

 

[Brian_G]

Other
Practically we need an alternative, but not a compulsory one to add to the consumers' woes.

For bikers?
Why not, also voluntary though.

Will insurance companies offer it though?

 

[Guest 290922]

I'm on a very tight budget at the moment.

 

[Brian_G]

I'm on a very tight budget at the moment.

That doesn't say much about your product BTW...

 

[Creag]

Interesting article on this subject:

When the Law of Collisions applies in a car accident as an uninsured driver

Vehicle accidents happen in the blink of an eye and at a time when you least expect it As a driver being involved in an accident is often a huge…

www.fanews.co.za

 

[Johnit]

I have had more than one car accident caused by uninsured parties, which meant considerable costs for me, despite having no fault from by side, and despite having insurance on my vehicles.

The RAF is to cover injuries (not damage to property), but it is abused and mismanaged.

 

[ChrisMOlives]

Definitely for all vehicles. It used to be run by a consortium of insurers who operated under strict guidelines and it worked fairly well. Until the Third Party Specialist doctors and lawyers (remember the Bobroffs) got in and screwed it up by lodging claims for countless millions of rands for general and special damages for a couple of broken bones.
I was involved in a claim years ago where the applicant was wheeled into court in a wheel chair only to be shown photos of him and his wife taken while they were shopping a week earlier. If that was how the system was being scammed then, its no surprise that the current mob of lawyers and the officials working in the RAF, have run it into the ground. So I guess its never going to happen.

 

[Johand]

No

So many people can't even afford fuel for their vehicles neverminded insurance, especially not how monopolized the industry would become with mandatory insurance, look at the UK.

You pay for the disaster that is RAF by paying R2.18 per liter extra for your fuel. About R90 for a tank of a mid-size car. And the money is not spent well. Rather reduce fuel price and provide transparency.